Obama Nails It! Into the Coffin of International Legal Order

President Obama has definitely put a hurt on international order by supporting and allowing the UN resolution condemning Israel. The ultimate problem is the position it will put President Trump in when he takes office. The relationship of the United States with the United Nations is now under deep scrutiny by a bi-partisan Congress. Trump is no fan of the UN. What will happen to world stability? Obama owns this mess.

As Written By Jordan Blashek for American Thinker:

President Obama is clearly not yet finished destroying what remains of the U.S.-led international order. By allowing a harmful UN Security Council resolution to pass declaring Israeli settlements to be “a flagrant violation under International Law,” he reverses decades of U.S. policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and makes a future negotiated settlement even more difficult for the parties to achieve. More importantly, the move strikes a devastating blow to the credibility of the UN and international law.

Eight years of Obama’s foreign policy have left the world on fire. Now, with his final foray into geopolitics, he has attacked the last remaining vestiges of a rules-based order.

For a president who prides himself on the long-game, this was an incredibly short-sighted and selfish move.

While the bi-partisan backlash has so far focused on the damage to Israel and the peace process, the longer-term casualty will be the international legal order itself. Why? Because going forward, the three major global powers – the U.S., Russia, and China – will concurrently disregard international law as they pursue their own interests. While we expect this from Russia and China, President Obama just all but guaranteed that the Trump Administration will follow suit.

International law only functions properly and effectively when the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council – the U.S., Russia, China, France and the U.K – unanimously agree to uphold its sanctity. Since World War II, international law progressed slowly and unevenly because the U.S., the Soviet Union, and China each exercised their veto powers in pursuit of geopolitical interests. Nevertheless, the United States unswervingly lent its power and legitimacy to the United Nations because we believed that it enshrined our values. We accepted the short-term limitations imposed by international law because of the long-term benefits offered by a rules-based liberal order.

President Obama is clearly not yet finished destroying what remains of the U.S.-led international order. By allowing a harmful UN Security Council resolution to pass declaring Israeli settlements to be “a flagrant violation under International Law,” he reverses decades of U.S. policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and makes a future negotiated settlement even more difficult for the parties to achieve. More importantly, the move strikes a devastating blow to the credibility of the UN and international law.

Eight years of Obama’s foreign policy have left the world on fire. Now, with his final foray into geopolitics, he has attacked the last remaining vestiges of a rules-based order.

For a president who prides himself on the long-game, this was an incredibly short-sighted and selfish move.

While the bi-partisan backlash has so far focused on the damage to Israel and the peace process, the longer-term casualty will be the international legal order itself. Why? Because going forward, the three major global powers – the U.S., Russia, and China – will concurrently disregard international law as they pursue their own interests. While we expect this from Russia and China, President Obama just all but guaranteed that the Trump Administration will follow suit.

International law only functions properly and effectively when the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council – the U.S., Russia, China, France and the U.K – unanimously agree to uphold its sanctity. Since World War II, international law progressed slowly and unevenly because the U.S., the Soviet Union, and China each exercised their veto powers in pursuit of geopolitical interests. Nevertheless, the United States unswervingly lent its power and legitimacy to the United Nations because we believed that it enshrined our values. We accepted the short-term limitations imposed by international law because of the long-term benefits offered by a rules-based liberal order.